Talk:Yibbum

Misunderstood?
It seems that saying Yibum is "misunderstood" is espousing a particular POV. I think it might be better to devote a small paragraph about the various reactions to the mitzvah. Frikle 12:11, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Edit by Jon513
Very nice edit, there! The article looks much better now. --Eliyak T · C 07:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Better, but
Yes, better, but it still doesn't read smoothly to someone coming new to the topic. In addition, one sentence was removed from the intro which I think puts yibbum into a worldwide context, namely identifying it as one specific form of widow inheritance. That's like writing about the Empire State Building as a New York landmark, and forgetting to mention that it is a skyscraper. Yibbum is not just an isolated Jewish custom that has largely fallen into disuse. It is a Jewish manifestation of a cultural form which has expressed itself in various ways over time and space, and which is still very much alive. I will wait a couple of days for any response, and then re-add, if someone hasn't beaten me to it. BrainyBabe 15:37, 27 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I removed it because Yibbum is a type of levirate marriage which is tern is a type of widow inheritance. It is like saying the Empire State Building is a skyscraper and not saying it is a building.  Jon513 18:43, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your response; I am not on Wikipedia every day. I appreciate your reasoning, but feel the introduction still leaves something lacking for the first-time visitor looking for info about the subject. My discomfort hinges on the term "levirate marriage", which is a specialist phrase unknown to the average person, whereas "widow inheritance" is much more guessable in the context, and so should be at the start of the article, to put yibbum in sociological context.  (The levirate marriage article needs serious work, but that's another issue.)  I am not certain that LV is a sort of WI, as you assert.  I am not an expert: they may be synonyms, or each may cover a similar but not identical range of customs.)  I suggest beginning along these lines:
 * Yibbum (pronounced "yee-boom"), a type of widow inheritance or levirate marriage, is one of the most complex types of marriages in Judaism. According to Torah law (Deuteronomy 25:5-10)....
 * Does that seem reasonable? BrainyBabe 19:15, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * as I understand it "levirate marriage" means marriage to a brother of the deceased; "widow inheritance" is to any relative of the deceased.  I understand your concern that yibbum should be put in context of other similar practices, but at the same time I am concerned that the term "widow inheritance" implies that the woman is force and treated like property (which is not he case in Yibbum).  How about a third paragraph in the introduction:
 * Levirate marriage has also been practiced by other societies with a strong clan structure. It is or was known in societies including the Punjabis, Jats, Huns (Chinese "Xiongnu", "Hsiong-nu", etc.), Mongols, and Tibetans.
 * --Jon513 19:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * That's a constructive suggestion, but I'd still like to see the phrase "widow inheritance" in the introduction; adding a new paragraph, rather than trying to get it into the first sentence, sounds good. Again, I'm not an expert, but from this article it could appear that yibbum was a requirement (ie something that people are forced to do) but that the halitza was created to create a way out of this obligation.  Widow inheritance is, in some cultures, much the same: a requirement on both parties, with occasionally a way to circumvent it. What about removing "levirate marriage" from the first sentence, and creating a third paragraph:
 * Yibbum is a Jewish expression of a worldwide custom. Known as levirate marriage (to a surviving brother of the deceased man) or widow inheritance (to any surviving male relative), it has been practiced by other societies with a strong clan structure. It is or was known in societies including the Punjabis, Jats, Huns (Chinese "Xiongnu", "Hsiong-nu", etc.), Mongols, and Tibetans.
 * BrainyBabe 09:31, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Chalitza is mentioned in the bible in the verses immidiately after yibbum "And if he does not want to marry her...". As far as we know they both existed from the beginning. All that changed was the attitude as to what was the better thing to do.Benignuman 10:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok, thanks for that info. I don't think that changes my latest proposal, above.  Any constructive comments on that (or just agreement!) would be welcome. BrainyBabe 11:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Having had no further comments, I have made these changes. BrainyBabe 08:01, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

If the deceased husband has no brothers
Would halitzah or a similar ceremony be required in that case? The article does not say, and I am curious. Thanks. --Fsotrain09 20:35, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * No. Jon513 (talk) 12:57, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

cut from other article
Levirate marriage has a section for Judaism, with a pointer to this as the main article. However, details keep accumulating. Some I have just cut. I think they are all mentioned in this article, but if not, feel free to incorporate:
 * Examples of levirate marriage include the marriages of Tamar and Onan the son of Judah, who was cursed to death for attempting to avoid conception during the process. An extension of levirate marriage is the idea of a kinsman redeemer found in the Book of Ruth. It holds the same idea of carrying on a lineage but instead of a brother, the duty falls to the closest kin. In the Book of Ruth, Boaz acts as the kinsman redeemer. This type of union is no longer practiced.

BrainyBabe (talk) 20:08, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

marriage status of surviving brother
Did Yibbum require the surviving brother be unmarried himself or was his marriage status irrelevant?Jlujan69 (talk) 02:44, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I believe his marriage status is irrelevant. Biblically, Jewish law permits polygamy, although the famous decree of Gershom ben Judah generally prohibits it. 58.111.178.170 (talk) 15:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Tamar
The reference to Tamar in Yibbum is misleading. The marriage of Tamar to Onan (אוֹנָן) after the death of Er (עֵר) was Yibbum, but tricking Judah into intercourse after he refused to give her his third son Shelah (שֵׁלָה) was not. Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 20:02, 16 December 2013 (UTC)